In a new filing, Google is fighting back against Fortnite’s numerous makers, Epic Games proposed corrective measures after a court ruled that Google engaged in anti-competitive practices in its Play Store. After the jury’s decision late last year, the two sides presented their cases on how Google should change its behavior in light of the decision. For its part, Epic Games issued a list of wild washing requirements, This included access to the Play Store’s catalog of apps and game titles for six years, the ability to distribute its own app store on Google Play for free, and more. It also wanted to end all agreements, incentives and deals, as well as penalties that would allow the Play Store or Google Play Billing to gain the upper hand over rivals.
The tech giant’s stunning and swift defeat was a historic decision, especially since Epic Games largely lost a similar antitrust case against Apple that had not gone to a jury trial. In the Epic-Apple lawsuit, the court ruled that Apple was not a monopoly, but agreed that developers should be able to direct their customers to alternative payment methods over the Internet. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, which refused to hear it, allowing the lower court’s decision to stand.
While the court in the Google case was convinced that the tech giant leveraged its market power in illegal ways, it failed to decide what next steps to take — that’s up to the judge. The new filing, along with Epic’s motion, will help inform Judge James Donato in a hearing scheduled for May 23 on what steps should be taken to rein in Google’s power.
Epic Games in April had detailed its requests in a proposed order, found here. At a high level, Epic wants Google to let users download apps from any app store or the web, depending on their preferences. Google doesn’t want to be able to block or force OEMs or carriers to favor Google Play. And it doesn’t want Google to be able to charge additional fees for routing around the Play Store, which Epic Games also believes is an anti-competitive practice.
The Fortnite maker additionally asked the court to impose other changes, including giving Epic access to the Play Store catalog so it can update users’ apps, without warning screens or extra fees. Additionally, Epic wants developers to be able to tell its users how to pay for their apps and services elsewhere, and how much they could save doing so. It wants to eliminate the requirement to use Google’s “User Choice Fee,” which only offers a small discount to developers who process payment transactions themselves, and more.
Google, of course, disputes how the court should proceed.
In a statement, Google’s Vice President of Government Affairs and Public Policy, Wilson White, referred to Epic’s demands as excessive and unnecessary.
“Epic’s requirements would harm the privacy, security and overall experience of consumers, developers and device manufacturers,” he said. “Not only does their proposal go far beyond the scope of the recent US court ruling — which we will challenge — it is also unnecessary because of the settlement we reached last year with attorneys general from every state and many territories. We will continue to vigorously defend our right to a sustainable business model that allows us to keep people safe, work with developers to innovate and grow their businesses, and maintain a thriving Android ecosystem for everyone.”
In the order filed Thursday in a U.S. District Court in California, Google argues that Epic’s demands put users’ safety and privacy at risk because it would remove its ability to enforce trust and security measures around the use of its stores. third-party applications. (Apple has used a similar strategy to fight regulations about opening its App Store to competition, saying it is responsible for user privacy and security.)
Additionally, Google says it will have to tell all third-party app stores, without the user’s consent, what apps a user has installed. This will expose the use of personal apps, including sensitive areas such as religion, politics or health, without rules on how this data is used.
The company also said Epic is asking it to remove safeguards around sideloading apps.
And if those arguments fail, in another tactic, Google points out that Epic’s proposed remedies aren’t needed because it has already settled with state attorneys general to no longer sign broad-based exclusivity deals with developers. Epic’s proposal would also prevent Google from working with developers to provide exclusive content through Play Store apps, which it says is a significant opportunity for developers.
Finally, the state AG’s settlement would allow any app store to compete for placement on Android devices, Google said, but Epic’s proposal would exclude it from that process, reducing competition. Without Google’s involvement, competing app stores will bid, affecting OEM margins, he said.
The judge’s upcoming ruling on the remedy in this case will be interesting to watch, as it will set the stage for how app stores that are considered monopolies will have to make concessions to allow for more competition. Although Epic lost its battle with Apple, the Justice Department’s case against the iPhone maker is still ongoing, as is its lawsuit against Google over its alleged search monopoly. The outcome of these cases will determine to what extent the power of the tech giants will continue to go unchecked, given the glaring lack of legislation in the US to reign in tech monopolies.
